Luke Shuey's ducking

[wicksy]

how about you keep going until u find something that matches your opinion. how can you admit that you are wrong and argue you are right at same time?

I only ever admitted being wrong about who the player was.... I think in my initial post I mentioned that I wasn't sure who it was.

 

[wicksy]

Is that like the Sinclair free who dived into Gaffs knees when he was picking it up, and had half the Collingwood fans in rupture about his suspension that was supposedly incoming?

No..... Sinclair did not pick up the ball, run 5 strides with his head still in a ducking position looking for the contact of Gaffs knees.

 

[Underdog]

I only ever admitted being wrong about who the player was.... I think in my initial post I mentioned that I wasn't sure who it was.

Yet you recollect everything else so perfectly...

 

[Galileo9]

I only ever admitted being wrong about who the player was.... I think in my initial post I mentioned that I wasn't sure who it was.

i think you only were interested in dirtying up another WCE player. just add them all to the mix. even if it happened once.

However you arent so keen to point out Dale Thomas when he ducked his head into Joel Corey against Geelong several rounds ago towards the end of the game. blatant duck of the year. so sort your own house first.

 

[Galileo9]

Yet you recollect everything else so perfectly...

yep the recollection of Dale Thomas into Joel Corey is a bit fuzzy for him.

 

[pies1958]

i think a few eagles fans need to ponder the flying lawnmower a little longer.

Shuey isn't alone in his tactics, he's just one of the most obvious.

The Eagles didn't win on Saturday because the umps favoured them. They won because they played well.

Enjoy it.

 

[Mateyman]

Not trying to troll pendles as I think he is elite however it gets annoying that others duck (albeit not very often) but shuey always cops it from bf posters. This in a game where most if not all tackles were legitimately high.

The reason anyone cops it because of constantly doing it, not doing it very rarely.

 

[Gizza]

not defending Eagles but what the hell has happened to the standard of tackling these days

Go for the bloody hips!
Unless the average height of players has dropped a foot in 10 years, surely it's not that difficult to tackle around the waist

It's because tacklers these days are trying to pin the arms to prevent an effective disposal. Which is now why players are forcing their arms upwards causing tackles to slide high. As far as I'm concerned that's a risk of tackling in that way.

 

[Gizza]

so what you are saying its up to the guy with the ball to ensure he puts himself in position to be tackled properly? this is getting silly by the day. i have no issue with frees not paid for running into players. but some of the thigns being said are well rediculous.

in any case, your recollection of events regarding mcginnity is wrong. was the collingwood player stationary or did he move in front of mcginnity? frees that wce get are no different to anyone else. its just that everyone now wants to scrutinise them to n'th degree. did that knee bend a mm? did that arm raiise a mm? quickly bring on super slow motion.

of course that ignores one fact that fans just want to degrade opposition players thinking this will give them a benefit in free kick count.

It's pretty clear that the player shouldn't be obligated to raise his head. But it's also pretty clear that you shouldn't penalise the bloke standing in front him if he doesn't. What do you expect that player to do? Move out the way and let him pass? That's ridiculous.

That being said, I think what Shuey is mostly doing lately is something completely different, and that's raising his arms to force the tackle to slide high. In this case it's probably a lot more of a grey area.

 

[Forward Press]

i think a few eagles fans need to ponder the flying lawnmower a little longer.

Shuey isn't alone in his tactics, he's just one of the most obvious.

The Eagles didn't win on Saturday because the umps favoured them. They won because they played well.

Enjoy it.

Shit, a reasonable opinion? What has BF come to?

 

[mehow2g]

i think a few eagles fans need to ponder the flying lawnmower a little longer.

Shuey isn't alone in his tactics, he's just one of the most obvious.

The Eagles didn't win on Saturday because the umps favoured them. They won because they played well.

Enjoy it.

Hes not the most obvious hes the best at it and gets rewarded for it the most lol, there is alot of stupid attempts every game.

 

[Grockadoc]

Every club has players that do it. Geelong have Selwood, West Coast have Shuey, Essendon have Monfries and Jetta, Richmond have Nahas. The only way to stop it is to call play on if a player getting tackled shurgs his shoulders to draw contact. If the initial contact is below the shoulders, and stays below, it is a legitimate tackle. However, if you shrug, and it then becomes high, that is a secondary action, and paying a free kick against the tackler is wrong, because they had a perfectly legitimate tackle in the first place.

Shrugging the shoulders to draw high contact should not be paid as a free kick, and should be called play on, similar to what they do when you duck your head and charge into opponents, to get high contact.

 

[mdizzle]

The only way to stop it is to call play on if a player getting tackled shurgs his shoulders to draw contact. If the initial contact is below the shoulders, and stays below, it is a legitimate tackle. However, if you shrug, and it then becomes high, that is a secondary action, and paying a free kick against the tackler is wrong, because they had a perfectly legitimate tackle in the first place.

Much easier said than done; it all happens so quickly that it'd be difficult for the umpire to judge whether there was a shrug or not. Not to mention that you'd be adding yet another subjective rule that would get ignored some weeks and hammered others, with the resulting frustration to the detriment of our viewing experience.

For mine, tackling is a skill, and the best tacklers don't give away many high tackles. Why? Because they go low and hard, just like the bloke they're trying to tackle went at the ball.

 

[Grockadoc]

Much easier said than done; it all happens so quickly that it'd be difficult for the umpire to judge whether there was a shrug or not. Not to mention that you'd be adding yet another subjective rule that would get ignored some weeks and hammered others, with the resulting frustration to the detriment of our viewing experience.

For mine, tackling is a skill, and the best tacklers don't give away many high tackles. Why? Because they go low and hard, just like the bloke they're trying to tackle went at the ball.

That's true however, it is much easier to break a tackle around your hips, than it is around your arms.

 

[Underdog]

Every club has players that do it. Geelong have Selwood, West Coast have Shuey, Essendon have Monfries and Jetta, Richmond have Nahas. The only way to stop it is to call play on if a player getting tackled shurgs his shoulders to draw contact. If the initial contact is below the shoulders, and stays below, it is a legitimate tackle. However, if you shrug, and it then becomes high, that is a secondary action, and paying a free kick against the tackler is wrong, because they had a perfectly legitimate tackle in the first place.

Shrugging the shoulders to draw high contact should not be paid as a free kick, and should be called play on, similar to what they do when you duck your head and charge into opponents, to get high contact.

Anyone would think this is the first time in the history of the game where players have had tactics to draw free kicks!

Mind boggling!

The onus is on the tackler. If it's too great of a risk to give away high contact, tackle lower. Easiest fix ever.

 

[Underdog]

That's true however, it is much easier to break a tackle around your hips, than it is around your arms.

So what? That's the downside and quite frankly a cop out for players with poor technique. At least you're not giving away a free.

 

[Bardo State]

I have no idea how eagles supporters can defend the bloke... Every team has one or two players that do it and it's usually frowned upon (I hate it when Puopolo does it). What annoys me isn't the initial action of shrugging if the aim is to break a tackle. However when a player just goes to ground with no intention of getting out of the tackle it is just ugly and beyond what should be acceptable.

It is very hard to deny that this happens to West Coast players more than any other. I've never said this before but honestly, if a serial offender of this was to cop a temporary injury with no lasting effects because of it, I think I would not be displeased in the slightest.

 

[mdizzle]

I have no idea how eagles supporters can defend the bloke... Every team has one or two players that do it and it's usually frowned upon (I hate it when Puopolo does it). What annoys me isn't the initial action of shrugging if the aim is to break a tackle. However when a player just goes to ground with no intention of getting out of the tackle it is just ugly and beyond what should be acceptable.

It is very hard to deny that this happens to West Coast players more than any other. I've never said this before but honestly, if a serial offender of this was to cop a temporary injury with no lasting effects because of it, I think I would not be displeased in the slightest.

Reminds me a little of the petulant tantrum your coach threw earlier this year...

 

[Grockadoc]

So what? That's the downside and quite frankly a cop out for players with poor technique. At least you're not giving away a free.

See that is wrong. The coaches continue to punish players who execute good, strong, legitimate tackles because there are players who use a secondary motion to draw high contact. That is complete BS. It isn't that hard to judge. If the shoulders shrug and the hand slips up, play on. If the head ducks into an arm, play on. If contact is made to the head, as one primary motion, then it is a free kick, but if you do something to contribute to a high tackle by executing some form of secondary motion, it shouldn't be paid. It is exploiting the rules, and it isn't sportsmanlike.

 

[PieBeast]

Don't think I've ever seen Shuey go into the contest without his knees bent or his whole body slightly tilted.

Has long surpassed Jelwood as the biggest exponent of the unsportsman free kick milking, would be a shame if he became paraplegic one day.

 

[Quinz]

Shuey had 6 free kicks on the weekend (1 2 3 4 5 6)- 3 for too high, 1 HTB, 2 in the back. I'd argue they were all there apart from the last one paid against Thomas.

And that's where the rule gets difficult. Shuey initiates the contact on this play, but the tackle does start high. There's no ducking of the head, but Shuey drives towards the tacklers arm. It's very difficult for Thomas to tackle lower in this situation.

The other two high tackles are after he has gathered the ball, doesn't keep his head down, doesn't duck into the tackle, and are a result of poor tackling technique from the opposition players. Actually Shuey's third free kick on the night was an example of a great tackle, gets low and uses his body to drag the player down and won HTB against Beams.

 

[Underdog]

See that is wrong. The coaches continue to punish players who execute good, strong, legitimate tackles because there are players who use a secondary motion to draw high contact. That is complete BS.

They are obviously not good and strong enough to wrap them up and deny them the ability to shrug the tackle.

Your definition of good is pretty minimal.

It isn't that hard to judge. If the shoulders shrug and the hand slips up, play on. If the head ducks into an arm, play on. If contact is made to the head, as one primary motion, then it is a free kick

You honestly trust the umpires to make these calls? That would be the biggest farce. What happens if players intentionally land their tackle low before taking out their head? It WILL happen.

Regardless, people carry on about all the free kicks Shuey gets when a fair number of them are not a result of shrugging a tackle. Nobody here knows the difference!!!

It is exploiting the rules, and it isn't sportsmanlike.

Most of the time the ball goes out of bounds, it is deliberate but is thrown in. Is that exploiting the rules or unsportsmanlike? Does it make it less so if you pretend to fumble the ball.

Come on...this line is ridiculously hypocritical. If there is a rule, players or coaches will try to exploit it to gain an advantage, lets not pretend it's isolated to high contact.

Hell, this is merely the result of teams trying to exploit tackling rules.

At the end of the day, people here want to take the rights away from the ball players and give more to the tackles. I would suggest that's not in the "spirit of the game".

 

[Underdog]

Don't think I've ever seen Shuey go into the contest without his knees bent or his whole body slightly tilted.

Probably because that's required to bend over, accelerate, change direction, sidestep or generally remain agile. It gives you far greater strength and speed in the contest. That's how the human body works.

 

[Underdog]

And that's where the rule gets difficult. Shuey initiates the contact on this play, but the tackle does start high. There's no ducking of the head, but Shuey drives towards the tacklers arm. It's very difficult for Thomas to tackle lower in this situation.

He's allowed to make contact to he tackler to try to break the tackle. The fact he's low already because he's changing direction is irrelevant. This has always been the case.

 

[The Falcon Strike]

Don't think I've ever seen Shuey go into the contest without his knees bent or his whole body slightly tilted.

Has long surpassed Jelwood as the biggest exponent of the unsportsman free kick milking, would be a shame if he became paraplegic one day.

I don't think I have seen too many players go into a contest without their knees bent. Perhpas a high marking contest where you have to stretch to your fullest.; Or perhaps one where the ball lands at your feet, but other than that - nope, every person, every contest has their knees bent.

Here's a picture of Scott Pendlebury on the weekend with no one on him, not even in the contest - just hoping the ball comes his way. Bloody ducker already has his knees bent hoping for a high free kick. I mean, bending your knees is the key weapon of ducking right? What other reason could he have for bending his knees? Not to mention Selwood who is tackling Didak, he is also doing a pre-emptive duck, just in case the ball spills to him and didak has to reverse the tackle (i know farcical right, Didak laying a tackle...)